Re: Rosetta: Need re-upload of packages to get upstream translations?

[Martin Pitt <martin.pitt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Jeroen Vermeulen [2008-09-25 20:40 +0700]:
> Whether a file needs human review isn't always clear-cut.  For example, 
> some new template may be imported, or an existing one renamed, and 
> suddenly it becomes approvable.  For example, Evolution has templates 
> with names that include the version number.  A template for a new 
> version then looks like a completely separate template to the system 
> (and in some cases, adding a number to a template name does mean that 
> it's a completely different file).  So instead of just importing a 
> template evolution-2.24 for Intrepid, we copy evolution-2.22 from Hardy 
> along with all its translations; rename that copy to evolution-2.24; and 
> then wait for auto-approval to recognize evolution-2.24.pot and its 
> translations as simple updates.

In fact this spethial case has bothered me a lot. We have never
supported running multiple evolution packages in parallel, since we
don't do them (our package name does not have the version number, for
example). Therefore I don't actually see a reason to not change the
domain to just "evolution" in our packages?

If a developer installs the upstream version, that would still install
the -version.po files, and also into /usr/share/locale (instaed of
/usr/share/locale-langpack/), so they wouldn't get into each other's
way.

Sebastien, do you see a reason to keep the versioned domain in our
evolution package? If it's just specified in one place (usually the
configure.in in GNOME), changing it should be easy.

Thanks,

Martin
-- 
Martin Pitt                        | http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com)  | Debian Developer  (www.debian.org)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature